Skip to main content

Full text of "Rapid Population Growth Consequences And Policy Implications"

See other formats

r_iru i_,/\ i
TABLE A Schooling and Earnings
Years of Education				Ratio Col. (4)/ Col. (3)	Years of Education 11	Ratio Col. (6)/ Col. (4)
Country	Age	0-1	5-6			
(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)
Mexico	32	$560	$1154	2.06	$2080	1.45
Colombia	32	$397	$1430	3.60	$2601	1.81
Chile	n.a.	n.a.	$101.4	n.a.	$194.0	1.81
India	32	850 Rupees	1500 Rupees (7 years)	1.76	2565 Rupees	1.71
Venezuela	23-65	3750 Bolivars	7500 Bolivars	2.00	18,000	2.4
n.a. = not available
Sources: Mexico and Colombia (32), Chile and India (33), and Venezuela (34).
Kuznets, Simon, Modern Economic Growth. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1966. pp. 80-81.
Aukrust, O., "Investment and Economic Growth," Productivity Measurement Rev, February 1959. pp. 35-53.
Niitamo, O., "Development of Productivity in Finnish Industry, 1925-1952," Productivity Measurement Rev, November 1958. pp. 30-41.
Krueger, Anne O., "Factor Endowments and Per Capita Income Differences among Countries," Econ J, September 1968. pp. 641-659.
Leibenstein, Harvey, "Incremental Capital Output Ratios in the Short Run,"/?ev Econ Stat, February 1966. pp. 20-27.
Patel, S. J., "A Note on the Incremental Capital-Output Ratio and Rates of Economic Growth in the Developing Countries," Kyklos, 1968, Fasc. I. pp. 147-150.
Morgan, Theodore, "Investment Versus Economic Growth," Econ Devcl & Cult Change, April 1969. pp. 392-414.
Leibenstein, Harvey, "Allocative Efficiency vs. X-Efficiency," Amer Econ Rev, June 1966. pp. 392-415.
Coale, Ansley, and E. M. Hoover, Population Growth and Economic Development in Low Income Countries, a Case Study of India's Prospects. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1958. replacement effect by a population increasing its rate of y. Sec (31).traditional inputs. Many of the nontraditional inputs have an elusive quality about them. They cannot be handled from an analytical viewpoint as easily as the traditional ones. The basic conjecture of this paper is that the assumption of a one-to-one correspondence between inputs and outputs is no longer tenable once one gives primary importance to nontraditional inputs. What is new is the rather persuasive evidence that the nontraditional inputs are usually more significant than the traditional ones, and hence the relations between population growth and nontraditional inputs should in most cases become central to the analysis of the "population-resources" problem.